Atomic Orbitals

[Mordred]

according to someone who has yet to demonstrate knowing the correct definition of mass

Is there not a problem when a massless electromagnetic field of the wave function or conjugate complex is used to represent the structure of a H atom that has a mass.

Ie you still haven't figured out why this makes no sense.

Lets start with define the complex conjugate. What does it represent?

While were at it "What is the formal physics definition of "Field"

Do you know the difference between a charged field and an uncharged field?

Have you ever used the equation

[latex]e^2=pc^2+(m_oc^2)^2[/latex] and applied this equation to calculate the inertial (variant mass) of the photon?

Invariant rest mass is your e=mc^2 but that is rest mass. Does not include your momentum.

The first equation is tested millions of times everyday in particle accelerators.

How do you think they discover particles with combined mass greater than the sum of the two colliding protons?

Back to define a field? how can you have a charged field with zero mass with the proper definition of field and using that equation? You can't not on a charged field.

Have you never looked at this symbol? [latex]\rho[/latex] ? ie energy/mass density. now apply that to the first equation.

First, I do have an explanation (I will present it in the long version of the response to this post) but even if I did not it is worthy and moral not to knowingly present false theories that are based on contradictions to explain something that physicists cannot explain which is being done regarding Maxwell's theory and the formation and propagation of radio waves. Why cannot physicists say that they do not know? Because if they were on the right path they would figure it out and since they are not they pretend to be by adamantly supporting Maxwell's theory in almost total conditioned blindness to the facts. Physics is extremely important to society as a whole since the advances of physics bring prosperity to civilization. We have been living off the laurels of the past physical achievements. Normally, failure of the society creates the changes that advances the society (dark ages) since the financial and social humiliation of people who are in control of the structure of physics and filter to the government which also extends to the moral and ethical parts of society brings inspiration (sun is the center of the solar system) but in this case an monumental effect my have been constructed before the said failure has occurred which is unprecedented. We should feel hopeful and celebratory for this extremely important fact that is achieved out of the normal order presented and controled by God. He must be a person that looks at the whole of society even the Arabs would probably agree maybe not.

in other words you cannot as you don't know the basic formulas involved nor taken the time to understand the article I posted nor the mathematics STudiot did.

got it. If you did you would have presented counter mathematics instead of posting from whatever articles you were copy pasting from.

I have no idea where morality comes into play when it comes to mathematically modelling a dynamic.

Leave God and morals stay where it belongs. Which isn't physics.

Stick to what can be mathematically described and defined.

This is my last attempt to hold a conversation.

I was going to present this with lots of explanation, but since you never reply I will just present a bald derivation of Schroedinger in one dimension, using Planck, De Broglie, mass and mechanics as appropriate. I shall use standard greek letters except for using f for frequency instead of nu to avoid confusion with v for velocity.

The (classical) standard wave equation in one dimension is

[math]\frac{{{\partial ^2}\phi }}{{\partial {x^2}}} = \frac{1}{{{v^2}}}\frac{{{\partial ^2}\phi }}{{\partial {t^2}}}[/math]

Edit equation corrected.

In order to separate the variables write the solution as the product of a function of x and a function of t.
Select the function of t to periodically return to zero and be finite everywhere.

[math]\phi \left( {x,t} \right) = \psi \left( x \right)\sin \left( {2\pi ft} \right)[/math]

Substitution this solution into the original equation yields

[math]\frac{{{\partial ^2}\psi }}{{\partial {x^2}}} + 4\frac{{{\pi ^2}{f^2}}}{{{v^2}}}\psi = 0[/math]

The total energy of a travelling particle is equal to the sum of its kinetic energy and its potential energy.

[math]E = KE + PE = KE + U[/math]

and the kinetic energy equals the square of the momentum divided by twice the mass.

[math]KE = \frac{{{p^2}}}{{2m}}[/math]

Thus

[math]E = \frac{{{p^2}}}{{2m}} + U[/math]

or
[math]p = \sqrt {2m\left( {E - U} \right)} [/math]

So substituting into Plancks theory

[math]\lambda = \frac{h}{p} = \frac{h}{{\sqrt {2m\left( {E - U} \right)} }}[/math]

But the wavelength is also equal to
[math]\lambda = \frac{v}{f}[/math]

So substituting into the separated original wave equation

[math]\frac{{{\partial ^2}\psi }}{{\partial {x^2}}} + \frac{{8{\pi ^2}m}}{{{h^2}}}\left( {E - U} \right)\psi = 0[/math]


Which is Schroedinger's equation in one dimension.

notice he specified TOTAL ENERGY>>>>>

[math]E = KE + PE = KE + U[/math]

now apply the equation I just posted.

Furthermore, the energy of an electron is represented with the kinetic energy (1/2 mv^2) which conflicts with the energy of Schrodinger's electric wave that is represented with Planck's constant #34.

If you did that you would find this statement is 100% wrong. You want proof look at those particles being produced at the particle accelerators. Go ahead add up the rest mass of two protons. How do they produce particles with rest mass greater than the sum of the two protons rest mass like the top quark.

The Schrodinger equations apply the harmonic oscillator equations via the Hamiltonian which accounts for the Planck constant.

In fact one unit of action is the Planck constant. As QFT uses action the Planck constant is the Unit of action. So how can it comflict when it is a fundamental in its equations.... The Planck constant is a unit of action in every Langrene and Hamilton formula...

Guess again. Might help to actually understand the math . That is one of the first lessons in QED.

 

see this wiki in particular line

 

"Dirac described the quantization of the electromagnetic field as an ensemble of harmonic oscillators with the introduction of the concept of creation and annihilation operators of particles".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_electrodynamics

 

the creation and annihilation operators is equal to a quanta of action in QED is a unit of action in the Schrodinger. It is also in the Heisenburg picture but there is a difference in the time ordering operator. Here is a little trivial detail to help with the Schrodinger math. the state vectors evolve in time but the operators are constant with respect to time. In the Heisenberg picture the observables are time dependent and state vectors time independent however that is just a coordinate choice of observers and rotations. Passive vs active transformations.

 

Very few posters would recognize that term so here for everyone. Here is the "Schrodinger and Heisenburg picture".

 

http://www.glue.umd.edu/afs/glue.umd.edu/department/phys/courses/Phys622/public_html/ji/lecture11.pdf

 

You will notice Studiot posted some of these equations.

 

By the way there is 3 QM time ordering views. Dirac being the other here is the 3. You will notice it also shows details on the Jaynes Cumming Hamilton I mentioned previously

 

http://uncw.edu/phy/documents/Shafer_09.pdf

 

However Ivy nothing you have said has shown me you were referring to these distinctions nor understood them.

 

You will note there is 3 parts to the Jaynes Cumming equation this corresponds to the three views under QM.

 

1) the energy contained in the field

2) the energy of atomic transitions

3) the interaction energy of the atom and the field. Full definitions in Article.

 

lol saves me from latexing them. Anyways they are conveniently arranged in that order in the equation.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Mordred

[swansont]

A quick response to post #49: to the quote "Seem to me that you are arguing that if something has a mass, it should not be with a wave equation".

 

 

This quote is a complete and utter deception since water has a mass and can be represented with a wave equation. The essence of my statement is that an entity that has a mass such as an electron or a proton cannot be represented with an electric field by leaving out that Schrodinger is representing an electron with electric field with the above statement is unethical and patently unfair.

 

 

 

The wave function is not an electric field, so that's moot.

[studiot]

 

 

The wave function is not an electric field, so that's moot.

 

Yes indeed, let's clear up what the wave function is.

 

The momentum p_x of classical theory is replaced by the operator

 

[math] - \frac{{ih}}{{2\pi }}\frac{{\partial \psi }}{{\partial x}}[/math]

 

 

and the total energy E of classical theory is replaced by the operator

 

[math] + \frac{{ih}}{{2\pi }}\frac{{\partial \psi }}{{\partial t}}[/math]

 

in quantal theory.

 

The wave function, therefore, is something that vibrates in time and space.

The projection or shadow cast by it on the time axis is Energy

The projection or shadow on the three axes of space are the three components of momenta.

 

Edited July 19, 2017 by studiot

[Eise]

I remember that his thread started with a very basic misunderstanding of Ivylove of what the wave function is. Now he argues that whatever interpretations of QM are false based on an old work of Schrödinger.

 

And then we get this:

 

We should feel hopeful and celebratory for this extremely important fact that is achieved out of the normal order presented and controled by God. He must be a person that looks at the whole of society even the Arabs would probably agree maybe not.

 

Time to put this thread into trash.

[studiot]

I remember that his thread started with a very basic misunderstanding of Ivylove of what the wave function is. Now he argues that whatever interpretations of QM are false based on an old work of Schrödinger.

 

And then we get this:

 

 

Time to put this thread into trash.

 

 

+1

[Phi for All]

!

Moderator Note

We try to leave threads like this open long enough for learning experiences to develop, but it's clear that the OP is interested only in building on misconceptions instead of taking advantage of scientific discussion with more knowledgeable members. That's when this stops being productive and starts being a soapbox for ignorance.

 

Add in the god references in Quantum Theory, and the generalization of Arabs, and it's clear we need some closure.